I believe that every religion has the right to define marriage within its own faith, scripture or situated ethic. However, the government legislates certain rights and privileges to "committed couples" -- health surrogate privileges, taxation, estate laws and the like.
To that extent, I think the government has to define committed couples without reference to any one or more religion's beliefs about what constitutes marriage.
Discuss
Carlos Garay on January 7, 2008, 8:58 PM
Well, in reality, marriage has always had religious ties. Dogmatic or not, we must remember that this country was founded on Christian principles, of which, I may add, still influence the whole population greatly.
But, if we do not base concepts marriage rights on religious or “situated ethic” views, then what do we base them on?
Izzy Hechkoff on January 7, 2008, 9:42 PM
The government should not be affected in any way by the church. We are supposed to be seperated after all.
Russell Fulling on January 8, 2008, 2:00 PM
Yes the laws regarding rights of inheritance and surrogate health care evolved because of marriage. However, the governement need not force people into a religious union to afford civil rights. Like wise married people should not rely on their religious union as a guarantor of civil rights.
McCallen Campbell on January 16, 2008, 11:22 AM
im with mantis on this one. i think the bible was a bad thing to base our goverment on to begin with, and then to turn around and say oh well, they will be seperated. i think we are doing a poor job on seperating. just because its religous for a couple to get married, doesnt mean it should be that way for every couple in america, be it a woman-woman,man-man,woman-man.
dennis ilic on February 20, 2008, 1:25 AM
BarryID, you are invited to participate in the idea “What is your definition of God? 100 words or less”. Your input will be appreciated. Thank you.
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or Register